1. No...don't watch mma for 'correct karate form.' Correct karate form is whatever works...not the mental image that the non-karateka here seem to have

3. Chambering punches, especially to the waist, isn't something we do. You punch from where ever you happen to be.

If its whatever works then it has no formal style and cannot be considered a style since it uses, "anything that works" this is excuse for trying to say Karate doesn't suck by saying things like no thats just for training, we dont do it that way, then why the hell train like that?

Chambering punches is done in most Karate classes, I used to attend one. Its a pointless way of training if you dont fight that way, thats why boxing is alot better for punches.

If you fail to define what Karate actually is then this argument is completely pointless. If you look at karate as unrestricted then you could put boxing techniques in there and still call it Karate.This thread is pointless and completely stupid.

Actually I like to watch MMA because I feel it is a better comparison to karate than boxing. Karate prepares one for all manner of attack. Boxing is hands only. And, depending on the range and situation a fully chambered strike can and is used. Here is an example of what a "fully chambered" strike can do. In karate its not about attributes, but timing and movement to set up techniques, not just blinding speed. Telegraphing techniques is actually a strategy utilized in karate. The key is what I am telegraphing is not necessarily what I am going to hit you with. Check out the vid around :40 and look for the fully chambered strike. Just think if he trained to strike like that. And if he did then maybe he is crosstraining in karate to develop better hands. He even chambers with his off hand as he connects.

Quote:Just looking at punches.Boxing strikes are quicker, i.e jab. More powerful as they make better use of body weight.

Karate has a jab and a person would make punches quicker, not the art. Karate also uses bodyweight very efficiently for punching.

Quote: Use better footwork

Karate is not for ringfighting, boxing's footwork obviously is.

Quote: and do not leave yourself open like Karate strikes (bringing the hand back to the waist).

This just showcases your ignorance of karate. The 'chambered' hand is a two way action (push/pull). In other words, you have a hold of someone and are pulling them inward. Or, it could be an elbow to a person grabbing you from behind. Depends on the kata or bunkai, but mainly how you train it.

Quote: On the one downside its easier to grapple someone from the boxing stance as its slightly less stable and the punches can be more overcommited. However in my opinion the pro's heavily outwiegh the cons.I base my answer upon assuming your are talking about classical karate such as shotokan, where the strikes are found in the katas, otherwise its not really proper Karate and just a sort of adaptation. Otherwise karate starts to become a much to broad term where certian freestyles will contain all the boxing techniques within them thus making your argument irrelevant.

Shotokan is classical karate? lol. Have you ever actually done karate? Your post comes off like someone who was in a mcdojo, has minimal or no karate experience, or just go by what you see on the internet.

Quote:Watch mixed martial arts, the majority of upper body punches are very similar to boxing although thrown more wildly in most cases. I have yet to see someone use correct karate form when punching in mma as seen in the traditional kata's.

I see straight punches in mma all the time....???

Your post would be like someone saying BJJ guys just lay on eachother. It would be like me saying that mma is just a "barbaric,blood and guts, free-for-all", like I've heard the ignorant say before.

You can't speak with any kind of authority of that which you have little, bad, or no experience.

_________________________
The2nd ammendment, it makes all the others possible. <///<

Quote: If its whatever works then it has no formal style and cannot be considered a style since it uses, "anything that works" this is excuse for trying to say Karate doesn't suck by saying things like no thats just for training, we dont do it that way, then why the hell train like that?

Ever heard the quote, "at first practice stances with utmost diligence, then rely on your own posture." ? You might want to think about that before making assumptions like you have made.

How would you know how anyone here trains?

Quote:Chambering punches is done in most Karate classes, I used to attend one. Its a pointless way of training if you dont fight that way, thats why boxing is alot better for punches.

I would say that chambering is done at all karate classes. It's the bunkai that you have no clue about. Just because you "used" to attend a karate class doesn't give you any authority on the subject. Chambering has grappling applications. Everyone that has attended more than a few classes at a good karate school knows that.

Quote:If you fail to define what Karate actually is then this argument is completely pointless. If you look at karate as unrestricted then you could put boxing techniques in there and still call it Karate.This thread is pointless and completely stupid.

The thread wasn't bad until ignorance and assumptions stepped in from non-karate folks trying to speak with authority on what karate is, or isn't.

It would be stupid for anyone to try and define in words what karate encomppasses to you. Go and "DO" karate for a few years, then come back and look at your posts.

_________________________
The2nd ammendment, it makes all the others possible. <///<

Quote: If karate is 'whatever works' then it is everything and nothing at the same time. Why call it karate? Why anchor it to less than perfect, outdated training methods (like horse stance to develop leg strength for example)? If correct form is "whatever works", then why is form so intrinsic to its study (kata)? What makes karate, karate if it is "whatever works"--why study it over anything else? No, karate does, it must, have a form that makes it karate.

And no, I don't think it is the rigid, caricature of 'karate' that many seem to assume I do.

Karate teaches you how to use your body. It's like kimo said, "there is more than one way up the mountain." The 'horse stance' isn't for developing leg muscles imo. It has tripping, throwing, grappling applications and imo should be quite higher that most forms of karate practice.

_________________________
The2nd ammendment, it makes all the others possible. <///<

What do you know? He punched from the waist? He clearly has no clue,lol.

Well Brian, I guess karate guys aren't the only ones who don't know how to generate power in an alive fighting environment. I mean, its not like you can actually knock a guy out who knows what he's doing punching from a chambered hand position like that.

Quote: Karate is not for ringfighting, boxing's footwork obviously is.

Actually boxing's footwork descends from mostly non-ring sources, as do many of the hand techniques. This isn't to say that the ring aspect hasn't influenced modern boxing's shape, but that, like karate in this regard, there is more than meets the eye.

As JKogas said earlier, one influence on modern boxing footwork is panuntukan (not a ring sport). The other is western sword arts.

As for hand techniques, one theory regarding the jab/cross combo is that it comes down to us from Greek hoplites. Basically, the jab was them ramming their sheild forward, while the cross was the spear. This was picked up by the Romans, who used it with sheild/sword. This is most likely the oldest combination in boxing.

Again, like when JKogas reminded us that many boxing gyms do teach 'dirty boxing' tactics, it's important to remember that there is more to boxing than what the uninitiated might be aware of.

--Chris

Edited by Ames (11/19/0812:29 AM)

_________________________
"Seek not to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought."--Basho

Quote:As for hand techniques, one theory regarding the jab/cross combo is that it comes down to us from Greek hoplites. Basically, the jab was them ramming their sheild forward, while the cross was the spear. This was picked up by the Romans, who used it with sheild/sword. This is most likely the oldest combination in boxing.

Hmmm, that's pretty interesting. Thanks!

Quote:Again, like when JKogas reminded us that many boxing gyms do teach 'dirty boxing' tactics, it's important to remember that there is more to boxing than what the uninitiated might be aware of.

Very true. My boxing experience is very limited. I have a coworker friend who trained in boxing, had his own for several years, and now is retired. I get some good info from him.

_________________________
The2nd ammendment, it makes all the others possible. <///<

Ames, your mind seems to be closed to anything that doesn't fit with your pre-conceptions. I've trained in Karate and in boxing (among other things), I know very well where the two are similar and where they differ. I can only tell you about my understanding of Karate as we live too far apart for me to train with you. If you choose not to believe it that's up to you.

The simple fact is that the surface of Karate is the vaguest fraction of the art.

The form is just a way of conditioning the body to efficiently move and generate power, much of which is later discarded as structures and movements are internalised and techniques become more natural and fluid. As this happens one starts to see where seemingly different movements are actually the same. At this stage Kata act as a guide for strategy, offering examples that the individual is supposed to understand how to apply and build upon and as an understanding of combat grows the Karateka learns to combine and recombine movements to fit his own personal way and the situation he finds himself in. Beyond this is understanding the potential of parts of movements and applying power in different angles and using varying degrees of tension or relaxedness in movements, all of which starts in simple macroscopic movements of the kihon and kata and at each stage requires a total re-examination of the art you have in front of you.

Shotokan as an entity had it's growth stunted by a number of factors. It is going to be very hard to find a video on the net of Shotokan karateka who have taken their training beyond the very basic in terms of combative application.

I've stated why I feel karate has better strikes and the grounds I've used to come to that conclusion. You have still not managed to give a reason why it is incorrect other than to say that boxing has better training methods than karate, as if you know how all Karate schools train or how effective non-boxing based methods actually are.

You are blindly insistent that you know and understand Karate movement and techniques and that you have a full grasp of karate training such that you are comfortable defining Karate and stating that it does or does not do X Y and Z.

It is clear that you do not know at all, but you are unwilling to even accept that Karate may be slightly different to how you perceive it. You make claims about what evidence there is or is not as if you've read all the books and interviews and articles that have ever been published. Yet if you had read a faractiob of the books in my modest collection (such as the one's from which I gave accounts of boxing-similar movements earlier) your opinion would be different, or at least not so closed.

You feel unable to discuss a punch without considering the training that goes into developing it as well as the strategies and footwork that go into applying it. On this point we are fundamentally opposed. In addition you are fixed on the notion that training defines an art, which while one cold conceivably apply this to boxing simply dosn't work for any other MA because the moment someone decides to vary the training practice the art would be something else, a point you neatly sidestepped.

If we cannot agree on what we are discussing we can't really debate it.

456 - I was saying that you are doing this to Karate and I wasn't doing this in my understanding of Boxing. As we agree it can be trained dirty.

------------------------------------------------------------Ames - When did I say this? I never said anything like this!

456- You never did, remember you think everything came from gloved Western Boxing.

Quote: ----------------------------------------------------

456 -If you didn't want someone taking your culture and wanted people in power to go away, wouldn't you say this is just dancing we don't practice this to spar".

--------------------------------------------------------Ames - This, and the paragraph that follows it, is just wrong. There are many, many sources to verify that karate did not originally SPAR. The fact that someone posted a video of Uechi ryu trying to come up with free sparring methods in the 40's is a clear example of this.Quote:

456 - Thats a common assumption but I don't know really. You are right Traditonal Karate men didn't Spar often (meaning play fight) they FOUGHT even in practice drills at a certain level you can still get a bloody mouth in striking drills at a certain level. It doesn't matter what is written it matters what the real warriors story was. Hell its written we don't kill women anc children but remember Hiroshima and Osaka it depends who telling the his - stroy.

These guys were warriors they were Marines, Army men from all over the world ect.. that fought in wars and killed people so you believe they wanted to learn how to dance??How can U trick a person that seen effective fighting on the real? Now this is only an assuption maybe Marines/warriors like dancing. Take your tap out MMA, these guys fought and knew you couldn't tap out. Karate has changed but some still train for real. So believe what you will but I believe the guys thats seen death. Maybe I don't read enough, i think exepreince mean something, I could be wrong.

----------------------------------------------------------

456 - Here is another shocker for you Karate has an overhand right and a upper cut, thrown different then a boxer but it has the same purpose. -----------------------------------------------------------

Ames - That's great. But if they are 'thrown different" then they aren't the same punch are they.

456 - You are right again they aren't delievered the same way, boxing isn't the only way is it, we are learning. I didn't say it was the same I said it served the same purpose to come over or under the guards or hit opening over or under. Of course its not the same when have you seen a boxer sweep a guy off feet and throw a upper cut while the guys falling or trying to catch his balance. Or use these punches while the guys covering from being stomped on the ground. Of course its not the same. One is taught to really fight and the other spars alot.

Quote:----------------------------------------------------------

456 - Boxing is far from unique

-------------------------------------------------------

Funny. What specifically about boxing makes it "far from unique". Apparently is unique enough to have it's own style of punching, footwork, and training methods, many of which have been adopted by a variety of styles today. Again, show me how boxing is "far from unique". That statement is ridiculous.

456 - Ridiculous maybe to you but really boxing is so simple (which is it's strength) that almost every art that I have studied have simlar basic skill sets, punches and some movement.

How many other arts have you studied?

Now I admit most of the gloved ring Sprots like Savate, Thai, Kicking boxing, SanShou, MMA and BJJ have all adapted western boxing (bc theres other boxing other then Kung fu or western) like movement but it's not Pure boxing because ducking and reckless bob and weaving bring you closer to knees and elbows or takedowns. So boxing is not unique it is simple and easy to apply. It's only apart of most of the above mentioned ring sports bc it's limited by range. So what else have we learned that ridiculous only seems that way when we are closed minded.

For your overall lack of knowledge (you seem to know well what boxing is to you) you also debate well, you should change your career to Law. But I think BS argues a more open minded and better case. And wonder among wonders BS and Meds agrees on something. Shonuff is Shonuff and Shisoshin is right on. harlan are you sure you are not a Master, going by conise well thought out replies.

Man this is some good sh%%, I applaud you all. I'm enjoying this even Ames occassional kick in the butt, are you a Lawyer the dreaded L word.